minimum wage presumption in Texas

2014And courts have held that “incarceration alone does not rebut the minimum wage presumption.” In re A.P., 46 S.W.3d 347, 350 (Tex. App.— Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (citing In re M.M., 980 S.W.2d 699 , 700–01 (Tex. App.— San Antonio 1998, no pet.)); see In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d 812, 819 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2001, no pet.).

2013Monroy, 2011 WL 3890401 , at *5 (citing In re M.M., 980 S.W.2d 699, 700-01 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.)).

2014And courts have held that “incarceration alone does not rebut the minimum wage presumption.” In re A.P., 46 S.W.3d 347, 350 (Tex. App.— Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (citing In re M.M., 980 S.W.2d 699 , 700–01 (Tex. App.— San Antonio 1998, no pet.)); see In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d 812, 819 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2001, no pet.).

2014Court to make a record by electronic recording) with In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d 812, 817 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2001, no pet.) (considering an electronic recording from a county not authorized to make electronic records and noting that, under section 201.009(c) of the family code, “in the absence of a court reporter or on agreement of the parties, the record may be preserved by any means approved by the associate judge”); see Rules Governing The Procedure For Making a Record of Court Proceedings By Electronic Recording, reprinted in TEXAS RULES OF COURT, VOL.

2019Gen. of Tex. v. Burton, 369 S.W.3d 173, 174 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam) (concluding that no evidence supported trial court judgment in suit to confirm child support arrearage and remanding case to trial court for further proceedings); see also Moreno, 363 S.W.3d at 736 (concluding that trial court should have applied the minimum wage presumption and remanding for further proceedings as to portion of order setting forth mother’s net resources and finding and imposing support obligation); Miles, 229 S.W.3d at 390–91 (reversing trial court’s calculation of appellant’s net resources and remanding for

2012Gen. of Tex. v. Burton, 369 S.W.3d 173, 174 (Tex.2012) (per curiam) (concluding that no evidence supported trial court judgment in suit to confirm child support arrearage and remanding case to trial court for further proceedings); see also Moreno, 363 S.W.3d at 736 (concluding that trial court should have applied the minimum wage presumption and remanding for further proceedings that portion of trial court order setting forth mother’s net resources finding and imposing support obligation); Miles, 229 S.W.3d at 390-91 (reversing trial court’s calculation of appellant’s net resources and remandi

2019Gen. of Tex. v. Burton, 369 S.W.3d 173, 174 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam) (concluding that no evidence supported trial court judgment in suit to confirm child support arrearage and remanding case to trial court for further proceedings); see also Moreno, 363 S.W.3d at 736 (concluding that trial court should have applied the minimum wage presumption and remanding for further proceedings as to portion of order setting forth mother’s net resources and finding and imposing support obligation); Miles, 229 S.W.3d at 390–91 (reversing trial court’s calculation of appellant’s net resources and remanding for

2012Gen. of Tex. v. Burton, 369 S.W.3d 173, 174 (Tex.2012) (per curiam) (concluding that no evidence supported trial court judgment in suit to confirm child support arrearage and remanding case to trial court for further proceedings); see also Moreno, 363 S.W.3d at 736 (concluding that trial court should have applied the minimum wage presumption and remanding for further proceedings that portion of trial court order setting forth mother’s net resources finding and imposing support obligation); Miles, 229 S.W.3d at 390-91 (reversing trial court’s calculation of appellant’s net resources and remandi

2019Gen. of Tex. v. Burton, 369 S.W.3d 173, 174 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam) (concluding that no evidence supported trial court judgment in suit to confirm child support arrearage and remanding case to trial court for further proceedings); see also Moreno, 363 S.W.3d at 736 (concluding that trial court should have applied the minimum wage presumption and remanding for further proceedings as to portion of order setting forth mother’s net resources and finding and imposing support obligation); Miles, 229 S.W.3d at 390–91 (reversing trial court’s calculation of appellant’s net resources and remanding for

2012Gen. of Tex. v. Burton, 369 S.W.3d 173, 174 (Tex.2012) (per curiam) (concluding that no evidence supported trial court judgment in suit to confirm child support arrearage and remanding case to trial court for further proceedings); see also Moreno, 363 S.W.3d at 736 (concluding that trial court should have applied the minimum wage presumption and remanding for further proceedings that portion of trial court order setting forth mother’s net resources finding and imposing support obligation); Miles, 229 S.W.3d at 390-91 (reversing trial court’s calculation of appellant’s net resources and remandi

2014And courts have held that “incarceration alone does not rebut the minimum wage presumption.” In re A.P., 46 S.W.3d 347, 350 (Tex. App.— Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (citing In re M.M., 980 S.W.2d 699 , 700–01 (Tex. App.— San Antonio 1998, no pet.)); see In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d 812, 819 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2001, no pet.).

2008In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d at 818-19 ; In re A.P., 46 S.W.3d 347 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.); In re J.A.G., 18 S.W.3d 772 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2000, no pet.); In re M.M., 980 S.W.2d 699 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.); Reyes, 946 S.W.2d 627 .

2008In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d at 818-19 ; In re A.P., 46 S.W.3d 347 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.); In re J.A.G., 18 S.W.3d 772 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2000, no pet.); In re M.M., 980 S.W.2d 699 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.); Reyes, 946 S.W.2d 627 .

1998See Reyes, 946 S.W.2d at 630 .

2024See generally Huey, 200 S.W.3d at 854 .

2015Cf. Monroy v. Monroy, No. 03-10-00275-CV, 2011 WL 3890401 , at *6 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 31, 2011, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (holding trial court did not err in determining amount of child support based on evidence presented regarding appellant’s recent income and assets despite fact that appellant was in jail at the time of trial for an undetermined period of time); Moroch v. Collins, 174 S.W.3d 849, 867-69 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, pet. denied) (affirming lump sum award of child support despite evidence obligor had zero income in some years).11 11 When a trial court orders child support that var

2014In re N.H.P., No. 05-04-00009-CV, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 10976 , at *2-5 (Tex. App.—Dallas Dec. 7, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing In re Martin, 881 S.W.2d 531, 536-537 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1994, writ denied) (when record contained no evidence of obligor parent’s wage or salary income and no evidence obligor parent was unemployable, only currently unemployed, trial court correctly applied the minimum wage presumption of section 154.068); In re Hidalgo, 938 S.W.2d 492, 495-96 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1996, no writ) (holding in the face of evidence of obligor’s wage at last 9 job, a one year period

2014In re N.H.P., No. 05-04-00009-CV, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 10976 , at *2-5 (Tex. App.—Dallas Dec. 7, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing In re Martin, 881 S.W.2d 531, 536-537 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1994, writ denied) (when record contained no evidence of obligor parent’s wage or salary income and no evidence obligor parent was unemployable, only currently unemployed, trial court correctly applied the minimum wage presumption of section 154.068); In re Hidalgo, 938 S.W.2d 492, 495-96 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1996, no writ) (holding in the face of evidence of obligor’s wage at last 9 job, a one year period